In your article on bank regulation in Britain you paint Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England, as an enemy not only of banks, but also of the City (“Mervyn Agonistes,” June 25, 2011). Which is perhaps why I am quite fond of him. The banks need tighter reins for their own good, and King’s emphasis on rules as the basis for good policy cannot but be a good thing for the economy. He has a good chance to impose them now that banks are not popular on account of their rôle in the financial crisis. Indeed, the largest among them turned into fancy “financial institutions” bent on eschewing all rules. Liberal central bankers, led by Alan Greenspan, allowed erstwhile banks too much freedom. With catastrophic consequences, too. If King is indeed the “economist’s economist,” as you claim, this bodes well. The messy business of minding banks must start with rules to ensure that they do not stray too far from banking itself. And this is what banks are wont of doing, as we have seen in the financial crisis.